Abstract

This article seeks to analyse whether Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle may be, mutatis mutandis, applicable to law. From a legal perspective, instead of position and momentum, Heisenberg’s equation can be expressed in terms of a rule’s precision and accuracy. Therefore, a working hypothesis, which might be called the “uncertainty hypothesis”, would hold that: An increase in a rule’s precision at a definite time, decreases its accuracy in an indefinite future case, and vice versa. Putting the hypothesis into practice in two case studies indicates that highly accurate rules may lead to injustice because of lack of precision, while pursuing high levels of precision may lead to lack of justice because of inaccuracy. The legal implication, if we accept the uncertainty hypothesis, is a recommendation to seek the best possible solution in terms of the best possible balance between the advantages of one perspective (precision) and the virtues of the other (accuracy).

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call